bulldog Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 the team may win or lose any game. but to consistently take timeouts to get guys lined up on field goals and early first down plays from scrimmage shows how unprepared this team is to compete once the whistle blows. 12 men on the field and we still give up a 7 yard run to Tiki Barber? :laugh: My cousin who is a Giants fan was howling over that one :mad: This team right now can't kick a field goal, can't convert a third down, can't put together a drive over 30 yards and can't win even with most of the calls and early turnovers going our way. Is someone on this board really going to try and tell me with a straight face that Spurrier has gotten this team to improve? An argument can be made that on offense the team has still not matched the performance in the opener :laugh: That's 8 weeks of sitting around and slowly finding out that all the ex-Gators are pimps. :shootinth All I have to say is that the ex-Gators brought in this year and the ex-Chiefs brought in last year by Marty don't approximate the old Bears and Rams players that George Allen brought here to WIN games back in 1971 and 1972. Those players could play quality football and quickly made a difference out on the field. The stooges we have picked up this offseason collectively from the good ole Gainesville days couldn't beat out the starters at Springbrook High School :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Originally posted by bulldog the team may win or lose any game. but to consistently take timeouts to get guys lined up on field goals and early first down plays from scrimmage shows how unprepared this team is to compete once the whistle blows. 12 men on the field and we still give up a 7 yard run to Tiki Barber? :laugh: My cousin who is a Giants fan was howling over that one :mad: This team right now can't kick a field goal, can't convert a third down, can't put together a drive over 30 yards and can't win even with most of the calls and early turnovers going our way. Is someone on this board really going to try and tell me with a straight face that Spurrier has gotten this team to improve? An argument can be made that on offense the team has still not matched the performance in the opener :laugh: That's 8 weeks of sitting around and slowly finding out that all the ex-Gators are pimps. :shootinth All I have to say is that the ex-Gators brought in this year and the ex-Chiefs brought in last year by Marty don't approximate the old Bears and Rams players that George Allen brought here to WIN games back in 1971 and 1972. Those players could play quality football and quickly made a difference out on the field. The stooges we have picked up this offseason collectively from the good ole Gainesville days couldn't beat out the starters at Springbrook High School :doh: This was not SOS's team coming into his first season. He inherited much of it. Look for some serious house cleaning this coming Spring. I think his recent comments about fraternizing with opposing players and questioning the dedication and work ethic of some players (generally) is quite telling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsanity56 Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 and it all starts with the OBC. Still don't understand how marty got all the flack, and SOS gets all the slack??????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Bulldog, I think that what we saw today has nothing to do with spurrier. The loss today could be put entirely on our front office. Snyder went with ramsey and the result is weak interior line. In this weather we needed to be able to run the football. To do that we needed an offensive line. We do not have an acceptabe offensive line. -DB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Bulldog, I couldn't agree more. That 12 men on the field play almost made me puke. Can't put plays like that on the front office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 The 12th man on the field was Bruce Smith, who was only about 5 yards away from being off the field when the ball was snapped. Really, a seven yard gain up the middle isn't all that unusual, although it hurts, but don't make something out of nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiggoDrill Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Originally posted by wayne and it all starts with the OBC. Still don't understand how marty got all the flack, and SOS gets all the slack??????? I don't agree, Wayne, but that's a pretty clever little ditty. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljer Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Still don't understand how marty got all the flack, He made the players work.......how dare he??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Spurrier gets slack because when watching the game it's pretty easy right now to identify the problem is with the QB. When watching Marty last year it was pretty clear the problem was the offensive design. It may turn out that the offensive design here is flawed, but, when watching the game you don't come out of it feeling that way. You come out of it feeling the QB left a lot of yards on the field by missing the easy play or simply failing to make any of the slightest difficulty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljer Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Spurrier gets slack because when watching the game it's pretty easy right now to identify the problem is with the QB. Art, There was no problem with Banks last year???? I'd take Matthews over Banks in a minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 I see your point Art, but the QB was also the problem last year. Marty might have not been so conservative if he had a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiggoDrill Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Originally posted by DrunkenBoxer Bulldog, I think that what we saw today has nothing to do with spurrier. The loss today could be put entirely on our front office. Snyder went with ramsey and the result is weak interior line. In this weather we needed to be able to run the football. To do that we needed an offensive line. We do not have an acceptabe offensive line. -DB True, we could have obtained a guard ... but I don't think that's why we couldn't run. After all, we have two proven tackles, a decent center and Tre Johnson. That's at least as good as the overall line talent last year: Two good tackles, an adequate center, and less-than dominant play from the guard position. I think the problems with the running game are twofold: First and foremost, Spurrier's running game does not seem to be developed enough to stand on its own. It is predicated on the passing game. He will need to address that in the offseason, or he will never win big at this level. Second, when the Giants were consistently loading the box, we didn't do a good job of making them pay, both because of Matthews' consistent inaccuracy and the senselessness of the plays called. Where was the slant? The toss to the Fullback? the play-action pass to the RB? The swing pass? The various screens we have seen? I don't like how Spurrier keeps trying to throw the long ball with Matthews, when it's painfully obvious he doesn't have the arm or accuracy to hit them with any consistency. We were having success with shallow crossing routes early, but they all but disappeared. You can't make a square peg fit in a round hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted November 17, 2002 Author Share Posted November 17, 2002 Matthews executing or not executing the dowfield pass has NOTHING to do with taking timeouts to line up on field goals or getting guys consistently jumping offsides or making key mistakes that cost games time after time. Yes, there is a problem at quarterback. And Spurrier is at fault for it. He banked on using Wuerffel in 2002 and if not Wuerffel than Matthews. Those two proved to be less than he had hoped and now, after Ramsey's holdout and not knowing the system well enough, is stuck until next offseason :mad: No, there isn't much he can do about it for next week, I agree with that. But again, if he could get the team to line up and use our timeouts wisely and not get the critical holding call on a 15 yard run or a pass interference call on an overthrown ball, then perhaps we can still win some games this year while we wait to retool again in the offseason This team has looked like a Turner coached team. All blow and no show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awesome Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Originally posted by wayne and it all starts with the OBC. Still don't understand how marty got all the flack, and SOS gets all the slack??????? Good one Wayne. I was one of those calling for Marty and Co. to get the axe at the end of last year, but now I'm not sure what I was thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted November 17, 2002 Author Share Posted November 17, 2002 Spurrier said in preseason his favorite play was the 'touchdown' yet we haven't seen him call that play too many times this season :laugh: Just a little swamp humor from us gators down in the 'glades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Gee, even Bulldog is growling and pissed now. And I thought I was the only one. :laugh: I'm so pissed at the Skins it may take me another year to get in 9 more posts, so that I can reach 1,000 and be entitled to ExtremeSkins retirement benefits. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Well, heck...than I should be the Defensive Coordinator next week. To me, it seems pretty obvious to stop this offense. Stack the box to stop Davis, run blitzes and stunts up the weak interior OL, and force Matthews to throw it down the field. Easy as that! Remember, although we ran more last year with Marty.... we also had what I considered to be an above average OL. Samuels, Szott, Raymer, Coleman, and Jansen. I'm sorry, but Loverne and Wilbert Brown couldn't hold last year's guards jockstrap. The answer is.... as Art has mentioned....it IS the QB that is making this offense spit and sputter. It's rather obvious that Matthews hasn't got the skills to a) stretch the field with the long ball.... relax in the pocket and let the play develop .... c) scramble out of the pocket and create something. He's your typical backup, succeeding only when the other 10 players execute perfectly and the defense gives him exactly the coverage he needs to successful throw the football. Only when we insert someone who can do the above things will you see Spurrier's offense open up and become more fluid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted November 17, 2002 Author Share Posted November 17, 2002 precisely Cskin. and what positions did Spurrier mention as being in his particular sphere of influence as head coach...........quarterback and wide receiver he left the defense to Lewis and Mendes and the special teams to Stock, who was returning from last year's squad. for all the time and attention at those spots by Steve isn't it just more than a little ironic that those spots are the ones where we aren't getting much if any productivity from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiggoDrill Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Originally posted by Cskin It's rather obvious that Matthews hasn't got the skills to a) stretch the field with the long ball.... relax in the pocket and let the play develop .... c) scramble out of the pocket and create something. He's your typical backup, succeeding only when the other 10 players execute perfectly and the defense gives him exactly the coverage he needs to successful throw the football. Only when we insert someone who can do the above things will you see Spurrier's offense open up and become more fluid. Excellent analysis. When Shane rolls out, you know there's no completion. When Shane launches it upfield, you know it won't be caught. If this QB's "strength" is simply that he runs away from pressure and throws it away, well ... shi!t, I could do that. He's paid to make plays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty dread Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 I'm done hearing the BS excuses for Spurrier. Spurrier is a bust right now, until he proves me wrong, he's a bust. The HC has to shoulder the blame, cause god knows we would be kissing his a$$ to the high heavens if we were winning. Yet another 12 men on the field call today, pathetic. And another roughing the passer, just pathetic. This team's biggest problem right now is itself. They shoot themselves in the foot game after game. They can't get out of their own way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTerps2002 Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 When you look at the talent on this team right now we should be no better than 4-6.... The thing that really concers me is the fact that we are not improving.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Not only are we not improving, we are not making any apparent changes to try and improve. I think what pisses most of us off the most is stubbornly continuing to do the same things with the same players to no effect. If it ain't working try something or SOMEONE else. Its not like we're 7-3 and on a 2 game losing streak, and afraid to mess with team chemistry. We have no team chemistry. Mix it up, bring in the rookie, give Watson or Betts the entire game to see what they can do....do something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Originally posted by RTerps2002 When you look at the talent on this team right now we should be no better than 4-6.... The thing that really concers me is the fact that we are not improving.... You quenched your own concern. We have improved as much as we possibly can with this talent. If we had Brett Favre at QB with Terrell Owens and Randy Moss at WR, then I'd be calling for SS's head. You can only improve so much with minimal talent. I'll guarantee a playoff berth within the next two years, but of course depending on the front office's escapades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkam Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 SS is dying from his own horrible decision to go w/ his boys at QB and WR. Unfortunately that is a decision that there was no way to recover from because there was no way to seriously upgrade QB (and WR) in the middle of the season. SS probably realized this 3 games in, but it was too late at that point. The really interesting thing is what SS does to rectify this in the offseason. I will be shocked and disappointed if SS does not take control of personnel decisions (at least in terms of offensive needs) and I will be shocked if we don't go hard after a veteran QB who has had success. This offseason will determine whether SS learned his painful lessons and whether he can win in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljer Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 I will be shocked if we don't go hard after a veteran QB who has had success. Who?????? Jake Plummer??:puke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.